What is at work is the abuse of Tito's personality in miserable daily political showdowns that have nothing to do with his era and are merely a continuation of the nineties, when one nationalism was answered with another.
This is how the interlocutors of "Vijesti" assess the opposition to the memorials of the former president for life of the Socialist Federal Republic of Yugoslavia (SFRY) Josip Broz Tito by pro-Serbian politicians in Podgorica, or pro-Montenegrin analysts in Cetinje.
After the Council for Naming Settlements, Streets, Squares and Erecting Memorials in the Capital, at the request of the Association of Veterans of the National Liberation War and Anti-Fascists of Cetinje, made a decision to erect a bust in memory of the first man of the former state in that city, this was opposed by the President of the Board of Directors at the Faculty of Montenegrin Language and Literature, Boban Batrićević, as well as a professor at that higher education institution, Stefan Todorović, and also analyst Ivan Martinović.
Cetinje would thus become the third city in Montenegro to pay tribute to Tito with a memorial, after Podgorica and Bar.
On the other hand, the leader of Free Montenegro, which entered the capital's Assembly as part of a coalition around the former Democratic Front, Vladislav Dajković, said that he would propose to Mayor Saša Mujović to move the Podgorica monument to Cetinje.
More reasons for criticism, none real
Historian and editor-in-chief of the "Žurnal" portal, Vuk Bačanović, pointed out that Tito was a complex historical figure, and that different phases of his political engagement require different forms of opposition to his character and work.
He explains that one can be against Tito, whose army destroyed the fascist NDH and successfully dealt with other collaborators, against Tito, who in the first stages of his rule introduced rigid restrictions on freedom of speech and interned his former comrades on Goli Otok, exposing them to torture, and against Tito, who recognized the importance of anti-colonialism, political balancing, and non-alignment in a bipolar world.
"Or are we against Tito, who solved the national question in Yugoslavia in a complicated and wrong way, leaving us with a legacy of bureaucratic oligarchies that sold out that same legacy for a pittance, and then turned into the most rigid chauvinists, ready to put on any jersey in order to preserve power - which, roughly, sums up the political scene in Montenegro in the last thirty years?", Bačanović lists.
"I think that the current 'resentment' of Tito by pro-Serbian and pro-Montenegro forces is not a resentment of Tito, but a bogeyman they create by reducing historical facts to daily political needs," he believes.
Against nationalism - nationalism
Historian from Cetinje Jovan Muhadinović does not believe that the opposition to the former president for life on both sides is a paradox and adds that since the fall of communism, the falsification of history and its revisionism have been unofficially permitted.
"From the beginning of the collapse of the SFRY and the communist order in Montenegro in 1989 in the so-called Anti-Bureaucratic Revolution, in contrast to the pro-Serbian wing that was overthrowing the current government, a pro-Montenegrin current would very soon emerge in response. Pro-Serbian politics in the 1941s in Montenegro would initially turn its head towards the 'subtle' glorification of the collaborationist Chetnik movement. It is clear that this was in favor of the policy of the republican leadership at the time," he explains, adding that not all sympathizers and voters of this current considered the Chetniks to be patriots, just as the pro-Montenegrin current did not perceive the Green Movement of XNUMX as a liberation movement.
"Therefore, the falsification of history and its revisionism are unofficially permitted," Muhadinović points out.
He explains that the pro-Montenegrin current, fearing Serbian nationalism, responded to him with the same measure.
"Many found idols in the Zelenash movement, which since 1941 had entered into open collaboration with the occupier. Very soon after the collapse of the July XNUMXth Uprising, the collaborationists also became Chetniks. The Partisan movement was hostile to the Chetniks and Zelenash. Thus, some Serbian and Montenegrin nationalists claim the aforementioned movements as 'national liberation' and as idols of their ideology," Muhadinović assesses.
He explains that the problem with celebrating the greengrocer movement arises from the fact that certain people in the pro-Montenegrin current celebrate the greengrocer movement by connecting the incompatible - its achievements in 1918 and 1941.
"Since 1918, this movement has fought against the illegitimate abolition of Montenegro as a state, and since 1941, they have tried to achieve this as collaborators of the occupiers," Muhadinović underlines.
"In my opinion, the example and symbol of the defense of the independence and restoration of Montenegro is not Krsto Popović, but Savo Čelebić, who has been a fighter in the ranks of the Greens for the rights of the Montenegrin state since 1918, and since 1941, having seen the fall and collaboration of the Greens movement led by Popović, he joined the partisan ranks, liberating Yugoslavia in which Montenegro was restored on an equal footing with other republics," he adds.
Peace is a guarantee that nationalists are a minority
He concludes that the vast majority of Cetinje residents support the erection of the bust and believes that, among both Serbs and Montenegrins, nationalists who are against the emblem are in the minority, but that they are given great attention in the media, and that the peace in the country when war was raging throughout Yugoslavia speaks in favor of this.
"I would like to point out that neither all Montenegrins nor all Serbs in Montenegro are nationalists. I believe that these are just inflammatory minorities who are given too much media space. Opponents of the memorial in Cetinje and Podgorica are in the absolute minority. Newspapers want to sell a story, and politicians want to divert attention from existential issues. The best confirmation that hardened nationalists are in the minority is the decades of peace in Montenegro despite the war past in the former Yugoslavia," he said, adding that the preservation of peace and stability in Montenegro, despite all the unrest, is the merit of all citizens.
They cried for Tito, but blamed him
Explaining what has changed in the relationship with Tito, Muhadinović points out that the character and work of the former president for life are experiencing a tragic fate among the people.
"The man for whom the masses wept on May 4, 1980, became, ironically, the main culprit for the collapse of Yugoslavia. The man who was the first and so far the only leader of the South Slavic peoples to respond to the merits of the ordinary people by providing his country with what the people deserve. Just some of the many achievements of that system are: free education, free medical care, medical care abroad at the expense of the state, free apartments, employment with all workers' rights, the country's reputation in the world," he underlines, adding that, before him, such benefits were reserved for "the courts and the camarilla of the rulers of the people of Yugoslavia", while the ordinary people lived in utter poverty.
"And, of course, in the 1945s, the propaganda of the destroyers of Yugoslavia penetrated the masses, who blindly believed that the most respected South Slavic statesman in the world in history had destroyed what he had won through a bloody war with the people and built for more than three decades?! We should ask ourselves what of the aforementioned achievements the people had before 1992 or after 1992? For example, after XNUMX we have apartments on lifelong credit, ruined healthcare, education, illegal employment without payment of seniority and full contributions - the destruction of the working class and the impoverishment of the people," he added.
Bačanović assesses that nothing has changed in the relationship towards Tito, except for minor variations in the banal approach to his personality.
"The "Serbian" Tito in Montenegro is, for the most part, still reduced to a constructed personality, a Cold War scarecrow from the banal propaganda of the Ravna Gora and Ljotić emigration, while this 'Montenegrin' one, until recently, served as a mask of rigid anti-Serbian chauvinism, which is now slowly being rejected, given that the ideological purification of figures like Sekula Drljević, Savić Marković Štedimlija, Krsto Zrnovo Popović, and, as I see it, some green Serbian racists of Montenegrin style and experience - like Nikola Petanović - who, paradoxically, should become the ideologist of national Montenegrinism," he believes.
Neither white nor green, there were both around him
Martinović states in his column that the founder of the Communist Party of Yugoslavia in Montenegro, Jovan Tomašević, was a white man, and that many other white men would have monuments if they had joined the Partisans.
Responding to the question of whether Tito can be classified as a "white" or "green" party, given that members of both parties belonged to the People's Liberation Movement, Bačanović points out that the former president's association was also divided into factions that led to the breakup of Yugoslavia after his death.
"If Montenegro truly nurtured a responsible attitude towards the past, and thereby took genuine care of Montenegrin society, historians, sociologists and anthropologists would very easily arrive at the real reasons for political and identity divisions in Montenegrin society and their correlations - including Tito's role in these processes, which, again, is neither banal nor unambiguous," he explains.
However, as he adds, historical eras cannot be interpreted solely through the personalities of leaders, especially not the Yugoslav era, in which Tito's entourage was divided into countless factions.
"In the end, what they had in common was that they destroyed a common state. In that sense, reducing Tito to a supporter of Petrović or Karađorđević from the beginning of the last century would be very provincial and banal," said Bačanović.
Muhadinović recalls that Tito, as a sworn communist, in order to strengthen the People's Liberation Army and reconcile the people since 1944, allowed access to all members of the collaborationist troops who had not committed crimes.
"This also occurred after King Petar II Karađorđević's call for the Chetniks, members of the Yugoslav Army in the homeland, to support Tito. That's why many Greens and Bjelas found themselves in the ranks of the Partisans," he explains.
Homage to time or daily politics?
The newspaper's interlocutors disagree on whether it is too late to erect a bust after parting ways with the state, economy, and foreign policy arrangements left behind by Tito.
Bačanović points out that this act is used for political showdowns that have nothing to do with the era of socialism.
"I don't see that erecting a monument to Tito in Montenegro is anything more than reducing his personality to a joker in miserable political showdowns that have nothing to do with his era. Instead of returning to personalities, it would be far more appropriate to re-examine and re-evaluate ideas - especially those about anti-colonialism and the unity of the Balkan peoples characteristic of the era of socialist Yugoslavia," he underlines, adding that, in a multipolar world, small nations are doomed to disappear if they do not stick together.
"In that sense, we are dealing less with Tito and more with the libertarian ideas that he himself grew up on, but which, for various reasons, which he could or could not influence, he failed to consolidate as a lasting legacy," Bačanović pointed out.
On the other hand, Muhadinović believes that now is the right time to erect a monument.
"For monuments to the only true national leader of the Yugoslav people and the man under whose presidency Montenegro, especially the people, experienced the greatest progress in 500 years of history, this is the right moment! Young generations, and especially current and future politicians, should have such a role model in front of them. In recent decades, we have witnessed the collapse of the republics of the former Yugoslavia. Obviously, the politicians of the states that emerged on the ruins of the great Yugoslavia do not have the necessary role models or abilities," he concludes.
Đurašković: Citizens support the initiative
Responding to a question from "Vijesti" whether he would reconsider the decision to erect the monument due to the opposition of analysts, Cetinje Mayor Nikola Đurašković said that he appreciated their views, but that a significant portion of citizens supported the initiative.
He added that the decision was not his personally, but was made by the capital's Assembly, based on the initiative of the Association of National Liberation War Fighters and Anti-Fascists of Cetinje, which was submitted on November 27 of last year, but that the process was carried out in accordance with procedures and there is currently no basis for reconsidering the decision.
He denies that the erection of the bust is related to the fact that local elections are being held in the capital this year.
"The implementation of the initiative this year is not politically motivated, but is determined by the dynamics of procedures and administrative deadlines, which necessitated that everything be finalized this year. It is important to emphasize that this is not related to the holding of local elections," Đurašković told "Vijesti".
Janković: The socialist period should not be considered negative
The president of the Cetinje branch of the Civic Movement (GP) URA, which is part of the ruling majority in the capital, Slavko Janković, told "Vijesti" that as the representative of that party in the local parliament and the Council for proposing the names of settlements, streets and squares and erecting memorials, he supported the initiative when it was on the agenda.
Responding to the question of whether the decision should be reconsidered due to criticism from analysts, he emphasizes that he understands the arguments, but that he still believes that Cetinje should not consider the period of Tito's rule as negative.
"We understand the arguments of the professional public 'for' and 'against', but we believe that the capital Cetinje definitely should not bear the regret of the period 1945-1980, when our city was at the peak of its economic power, when people came and stayed, built their families, and made Cetinje one of the most recognized industrial centers of the country," he told the newspaper.
As he added, this does not mean that Cetinje should not repay many Cetinjeans from that and other periods, bearing in mind the fact that 49 of its fellow citizens have been proclaimed national heroes, as well as that the city itself bears the title of the City of Heroes, but also that Cetinje has been the centuries-old capital of Montenegro.
He, like Đurašković, denies that the announcement of the bust is connected to the election year.
"We consider the initiative symbolic in the context of 80 years of the victory of anti-fascist Europe over fascism, taking into account in particular the fact that the first armed uprising in Europe during World War II was raised in several places around Cetinje," says Janković.
The Democrats, who are also part of the ruling majority, did not respond to questions about whether they support the act and whether it is an election campaign.
Bonus video:
